Engagement of general practitioners in falls prevention and referral to occupational therapists

Introduction: Falls prevention is a key activity for general practitioners, occupational therapists and other allied health professionals. Despite evidence for multidisciplinary community-based interventions, uptake of falls prevention is variable. General practitioners are crucial in identifying older people at risk of falls and referring for intervention. This research aims to identify the current practice of general practitioners in falls prevention and to identify opportunities for occupational therapists in particular to extend their role in falls prevention in primary care. Method: A total of 4000 paper surveys were mailed to randomly selected general practitioners within 209 clinical commissioning groups in England. Online surveys were also distributed via clinical commissioning groups to approximately 3200 general practitioners. Descriptive analysis of the data was undertaken. Results: A total of 152 general practitioners responded. More than half indicated they were familiar with the UK guidelines for falls risk screening, but less than a third implemented these. Only 31% routinely asked older people if they had fallen. Whilst 90% identified occupational therapists as providing evidence-based falls prevention, only 74% referred to occupational therapy. Conclusion: There are gaps in general practitioners’ falls prevention referral practices to occupational therapists and allied health professionals. Better general practitioner pathways could enhance the quality of falls-prevention care for older people at risk.Research Career Development Grant from the UK Occupational Therapy Research Foundation awarded in 2015

Hypertensive patients' perceptions of their physicians' knowledge about them: a cross-sectional study in Japan

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In order to evaluate the difference in quality of primary care provided by physicians between the types of medical institutions in Japan, we examined whether the physicians' comprehensive knowledge of their patients is perceived differently by the patients seen at clinics and hospitals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with prescriptions for hypertensive drugs were approached sequentially at 13 pharmacies, and were administered a questionnaire on their perception of their physician's knowledge about them. Data were obtained for 687 patients (362 from clinics and 325 from hospitals). A physician's knowledge of his or her patients was assessed according to six aspects: their medical history, their current medications, history of allergy, what worries patients most about their health, patients' values and beliefs on their health, and patients' roles and responsibilities at work, home, or school. Responses were scored from 1 through 6 (1: knows very well; 6: doesn't know at all).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients treated in clinics were seen more frequently, for a longer period, and had fewer complications than the patients who were treated in hospitals. Among the six aspects of physicians' knowledge assessed, 79.3% of the patients reported that their physicians knew their complete list of medications "very well or well," while 28.3% reported the same about their roles and responsibilities at work, home, or school. Physicians in clinics were considered to know their patients' worries about their health (p = 0.004) and the roles and responsibilities of the patients at work, home, or school (p = 0.028) well. Multiple regression analysis showed that the type of medical institutions remained as a significant variable only for the aspect of patients' worries about their health. The factor that consistently affected the patients' perception of physicians' knowledge about them was the patients' age.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Hypertensive patients' perceptions of their physicians' knowledge about them did not differ significantly between clinics and hospitals in Japan for most of the aspects. In order to differentiate the roles of physicians in hospitals and clinics better and ensure the quality of primary care, the establishment of a standardized educational system to train primary care physicians better is recommended.</p

Viewing the global health system as a complex adaptive system ? implications for research and practice [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]

The global health system (GHS) is ill-equipped to deal with the increasing number of transnational challenges. The GHS needs reform to enhance global resilience to future risks to health. In this article we argue that the starting point for any reform must be conceptualizing and studying the GHS as a complex adaptive system (CAS) with a large and escalating number of interconnected global health actors that learn and adapt their behaviours in response to each other and changes in their environment. The GHS can be viewed as a multi-scalar, nested health system comprising all national health systems together with the global health architecture, in which behaviours are influenced by cross-scale interactions. However, current methods cannot adequately capture the dynamism or complexity of the GHS or quantify the effects of challenges or potential reform options. We provide an overview of a selection of systems thinking and complexity science methods available to researchers and highlight the numerous policy insights their application could yield. We also discuss the challenges for researchers of applying these methods and for policy makers of digesting and acting upon them. We encourage application of a CAS approach to GHS research and policy making to help bolster resilience to future risks that transcend national boundaries and system scale

Viewing the global health system as a complex adaptive system – implications for research and practice

The global health system (GHS) is ill-equipped to deal with the increasing number of transnational challenges. The GHS needs reform to enhance global resilience to future risks to health. In this article we argue that the starting point for any reform must be conceptualizing and studying the GHS as a complex adaptive system (CAS) with a large and escalating number of interconnected global health actors that learn and adapt their behaviours in response to each other and changes in their environment. The GHS can be viewed as a multi-scalar, nested health system comprising all national health systems together with the global health architecture, in which behaviours are influenced by cross-scale interactions. However, current methods cannot adequately capture the dynamism or complexity of the GHS or quantify the effects of challenges or potential reform options. We provide an overview of a selection of systems thinking and complexity science methods available to researchers and highlight the numerous policy insights their application could yield.   We also discuss the challenges for researchers of applying these methods and for policy makers of digesting and acting upon them. We encourage application of a CAS approach to GHS research and policy making to help bolster resilience to future risks that transcend national boundaries and system scales.</ns4:p

Does the attention General Practitioners pay to their patients' mental health problems add to their workload? A cross sectional national survey

BACKGROUND: The extra workload induced by patients with mental health problems may sometimes cause GPs to be reluctant to become involved in mental health care. It is known that dealing with patients' mental health problems is more time consuming in specific situations such as in consultations. But it is unclear if GPs who are more often involved in patients' mental health problems, have a higher workload than other GPs. Therefore we investigated the following: Is the attention GPs pay to their patients' mental health problems related to their subjective and objective workload? METHODS: Secondary analyses were made using data from the Second Dutch National Survey of General Practice, a cross sectional study conducted in the Netherlands in 2000–2002. A nationally representative selection of 195 GPs from 104 general practices participated in this National Survey. Data from: 1) a GP questionnaire; 2) a detailed log of the GP's time use during a week and; 3) an electronic medical registration system, including all patients' contacts during a year, were used. Multiple regression analyses were conducted with the GP's workload as an outcome measure, and the GP's attention for mental health problems as a predictor. GP, patient, and practice characteristics were included in analyses as potential confounders. RESULTS: Results show that GPs with a broader perception of their role towards mental health care do not have more working hours or patient contacts than GPs with a more limited perception of their role. Neither are they more exhausted or dissatisfied with the available time. Also the number of patient contacts in which a psychological or social diagnosis is made is not related to the GP's objective or subjective workload. CONCLUSION: The GP's attention for a patient's mental health problems is not related to their workload. The GP's extra workload when dealing in a consultation with patients' mental health problems, as is demonstrated in earlier research, is not automatically translated into a higher overall workload. This study does not confirm GPs' complaints that mental health care is one of the components of their job that consumes a lot of their time and energy. Several explanations for these results are discussed

The contribution of demographic and morbidity factors to self-reported visit frequency of patients: a cross-sectional study of general practice patients in Australia

BACKGROUND: Understanding the factors that affect patients' utilisation of health services is important for health service provision and effective patient management. This study aimed to investigate the specific morbidity and demographic factors related to the frequency with which general practice patients visit a general practitioner/family physician (GP) in Australia. METHODS: A sub-study was undertaken as part of an ongoing national study of general practice activity in Australia. A cluster sample of 10,755 general practice patients were surveyed through a random sample of 379 general practitioners. The patient reported the number of times he/she had visited a general practitioner in the previous twelve months. The GP recorded all the patient's major health problems, including those managed at the current consultation. RESULTS: Patients reported an average of 8.8 visits to a general practitioner per year. After adjusting for other patient demographics and number of health problems, concession health care card holders made on average 2.6 more visits per year to a general practitioner than did non-card holders (p < .001). After adjustment, patients from remote/very remote locations made 2.3 fewer visits per year than patients from locations where services were highly accessible (p < .001). After adjustment for patient demographics, patients with diagnosed anxiety made on average 2.7 more visits per year (p = 0.003), those with diagnosed depression 2.2 more visits than average (p < .0001), and those with back problems 2.4 more visits (p = 0.009) than patients without the respective disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety, back pain and depression are associated with greater patient demand for general practice services than other health problems. The effect of sociodemographic factors on patient utilisation of general practice services is complex. Equity of access to general practice services remains an issue for patients from remote areas, while concession health care card holders are attending general practice more frequently than other patients relative to their number of health problems

The factors associated to psychosocial stress among general practitioners in Lithuania. Cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: There are number of studies showing that general practice is one of the most stressful workplace among health care workers. Since Baltic States regained independence in 1990, the reform of the health care system took place in which new role and more responsibilities were allocated to general practitioners' in Lithuania. This study aimed to explore the psychosocial stress level among Lithuanian general practitioner's and examine the relationship between psychosocial stress and work characteristics. METHODS: The cross-sectional study of 300 Lithuanian General practitioners. Psychosocial stress was investigated with a questionnaire based on the Reeder scale. Job demands were investigated with the R. Karasek scale. The analysis included descriptive statistics; interrelationship analysis between characteristics and multivariate logistic regression to estimate odds ratios for each of the independent variables in the model. RESULTS: Response rate 66% (N = 197). Our study highlighted highest prevalence of psychosocial stress among widowed, single and female general practitioners. Lowest prevalence of psychosocial stress was among males and older age general practitioners. Psychosocial stress occurs when job demands are high and job decision latitude is low (χ(2 )= 18,9; p < 0,01). The multivariate analysis shows that high job demands (OR 4,128; CI 2,102–8,104; p < 0,001), patient load more than 18 patients per day (OR 5,863; CI 1,549–22,188; p < 0,01) and young age of GP's (OR 6,874; CI 1,292–36,582; p < 0,05) can be assigned as significant predictors for psychosocial stress. CONCLUSION: One half of respondents suffering from work related psychosocial stress. High psychological workload demands combined with low decision latitude has the greatest impact to stress caseness among GP's. High job demands, high patient load and young age of GP's can be assigned as significant predictors of psychosocial stress among GP's